If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

reason to carry

Originally Posted by corneileous

Not sure how reliable this is but according to a post made by one of the moderators in this forum, you can. Sounds like it's advised to only do it for something expensive being stolen, not just for a shovel that some dude decided to swipe from your front porch...lol.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Eidolon

"I thought I read or heard somewhere."

Try that as a defense in court and let us know how it works

Guess ya didn't see my post after Reba's where I posted that URL. But, A), I don't live in Texas and, B), you're on your own to find out what's legal and what isn't in the state you live in. I wouldn't just be going off assumption, I'd be makin' sure beforehand if I would be in serious doo-doo or not if I started slingin' lead at someone I caught trying to break into my vehicle out in the driveway or on the curb.

Sec. 9.41. PROTECTION OF ONE'S OWN PROPERTY. (a) A person in lawful possession of land or tangible, movable property is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the other's trespass on the land or unlawful interference with the property.
-snip-
Sec. 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:

(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and

(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:

(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or

(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and

(3) he reasonably believes that:

(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or

(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.

It would appear to me, and I am not an attorney in Texas or anywhere else (not even on the internet), that Texas law allows the use of deadly force as a response to property crimes especially after dark.

Character is doing the right thing when nobody's looking. There are too many people who think that the only thing that's right is to get by, and the only thing that's wrong is to get caught. - J. C. Watts

Sec. 9.41. PROTECTION OF ONE'S OWN PROPERTY. (a) A person in lawful possession of land or tangible, movable property is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the other's trespass on the land or unlawful interference with the property.
-snip-
Sec. 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:

(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and

(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:

(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or

(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and

(3) he reasonably believes that:

(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or

(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.

It would appear to me, and I am not an attorney in Texas or anywhere else (not even on the internet) that Texas law allows the use of deadly force as a response to property crimes especially after dark.

Texas' law is not verbatim identical to Alabama's law, but its provisions and meanings certainly are. I know I've read others that have similar provisions/protections for those who use deadly force to stop property crimes in-progress. It's why I'm always a bit baffled by people who say it's only "legal" to use a gun in defense from an imminent threat. Some state laws are catching up to the reality that one only knows how "imminent" a threat was after the threat became real, and with that premise in mind, state laws are more and more recognizing that property owners should have the backing of government in the form of a presumption of justification in using deadly force once the criminal acts of various degrees of arson, burglary and robbery have already happened. It's certainly up to each individual to figure out what time, if any, is the right time to engage with a gun in other-than-immediate-response-to-a-violent-attack situations, but that it's "legal" in several states is not in question at all. The fact that blood isn't flooding the streets of the jurisdictions that give that much discretion to its citizenry should be proof enough that their governments were right to lower regulations on the law-abiding, and establish a permanent implied threat of severe, on-the-spot consequences for criminals. The citizenry should be trusted, and it works just fine in states where they are trusted with the most autonomy concerning uses of force.

Blues

No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

I am a small town Midwestern boy who had never had anything like this happen to myself or anyone I know. not sure how I would have reacted if I had seen the criminal. definitely know I will be carrying whenever possible from here on out. Guess I just needed to tell my story and hope others can learn from my misfortune it happens quick and honestly believe not everything can be forseen. I am pretty carful of my surroundings etc.

Amarillo is in Texas..... I check the current laws for carry in each state I will be in, all laws are different for carrying and also different for using. Every state allows protection of self and others, but property varies wildly.

"will always wonder what would have happened if things would have been a minute or two either way"

If people had read the OP you might have seen he was shaken into full time carry because he saw how close he had come to catching the guy in the act. Getting cracked in the head by whatever was used on the window might seem a real possibility to him now.

He had made two trips very close together it was between those trips that it all went down.

But its a lot more fun to just blather on about nothing.

Some folks might need to watch a little less Big Bang Theory and think for themselves on the Indiana Jones thing...